Jump to content
Brisketexan

Lets fix the police

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I've seen the same data, as well as the rebukes that there is no causation and a thousand other variables were not entertained.  The point of the sidearm is the significant lengths departments go through to vet and review righteous and unrighteous shootings, firings, and other acts.  These are not cowboys and it's a long, intentionally painful process to have to endure.  EVERY time there is a physical altercation or a weapon is drawn, the line of sight from the very top is opened and they go through it as painfully and slowly as they can make it.  

Sure doesn't look like that happened in Minneapolis.  18 use of force complaints against Chauvin.  Sure as shit smells like a PD that covers that shit up.  And being that the head the rank-and-file cops calls for exactly that (let us police the way we want to!  Don't handcuff us!), it doesn't come as any surprise.

Where are the studies on how often cops lie on the stand?  Lie in their reports?  In the history of this board, damned near every poster has at least one (often more) stories of cops flat-out lying, committing acts of brutality, or other shit like that.

I'm sorry, but the fact that damned near everyone has a story about a shitty cop encounter --- and note, most of the folks on this forum are college-educated, from relatively decent families, etc. --, and the fact that black community leaders have been telling us about this shit for DECADES tells us that it's real, and it's pervasive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, T-shirt Sip said:

DA’s decide what gets put forth onto that jury. I don’t care who’s on the jury, I care to see if the DA submitted all available evidence. 

Sounds good in this particular instance, but it's a bad idea in the general case.  Grand juries investigate ultimately innocent people with some frequency.  It would be a shit show if all their investigations and deliberations were made public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Sure doesn't look like that happened in Minneapolis.  18 use of force complaints against Chauvin.  Sure as shit smells like a PD that covers that shit up.  And being that the head the rank-and-file cops calls for exactly that (let us police the way we want to!  Don't handcuff us!), it doesn't come as any surprise.

Where are the studies on how often cops lie on the stand?  Lie in their reports?  In the history of this board, damned near every poster has at least one (often more) stories of cops flat-out lying, committing acts of brutality, or other shit like that.

I'm sorry, but the fact that damned near everyone has a story about a shitty cop encounter --- and note, most of the folks on this forum are college-educated, from relatively decent families, etc. --, and the fact that black community leaders have been telling us about this shit for DECADES tells us that it's real, and it's pervasive.

I'd want the city and police leaders justifying someone with that number of incidents in an active duty role?  This goes above the commissioner.  Over the course of a career, is 18 high?  Seems like it.  So why was he on active duty?  Was he the senior on the call?  Based upon the actions of the others, seems like it as they deferred to his lead?

As for lying, statistics, who knows.  Goes for everyone in public service.  Short of gnashing teeth, you have an opportunity with these officers to get your pound of flesh.  I did see the stats for 2019 and unarmed accounts.  Based upon media coverage, I thought it would have been in triple digits (even one is too many, but you get the point)

  • 9 unarmed blacks killed in 2019
  • 6 unarmed Hispanics killed in 2019
  • 19 unarmed whites killed in 2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I'd want the city and police leaders justifying someone with that number of incidents in an active duty role?  This goes above the commissioner.  Over the course of a career, is 18 high?  Seems like it.  So why was he on active duty?  Was he the senior on the call?  Based upon the actions of the others, seems like it as they deferred to his lead?

As for lying, statistics, who knows.  Goes for everyone in public service.  Short of gnashing teeth, you have an opportunity with these officers to get your pound of flesh.  I did see the stats for 2019 and unarmed accounts.  Based upon media coverage, I thought it would have been in triple digits (even one is too many, but you get the point)

  • 9 unarmed blacks killed in 2019
  • 6 unarmed Hispanics killed in 2019
  • 19 unarmed whites killed in 2019

I want the pound of flesh for ALL of them.

I want a cop lying to get a person arrested and/or charged and/or convicted to be a felony, punishable by a minimum of 5 years in prison OR the minimum prison term of the charge the lie was intended to support, whichever is greater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I'd want the city and police leaders justifying someone with that number of incidents in an active duty role?  This goes above the commissioner.  Over the course of a career, is 18 high?  Seems like it.  So why was he on active duty?  Was he the senior on the call?  Based upon the actions of the others, seems like it as they deferred to his lead?

As for lying, statistics, who knows.  Goes for everyone in public service.  Short of gnashing teeth, you have an opportunity with these officers to get your pound of flesh.  I did see the stats for 2019 and unarmed accounts.  Based upon media coverage, I thought it would have been in triple digits (even one is too many, but you get the point)

  • 9 unarmed blacks killed in 2019
  • 6 unarmed Hispanics killed in 2019
  • 19 unarmed whites killed in 2019

I'd really like to see the MPD statistics on use of force complaints with their other officers.  is it 18 over 19 years?  it seems like 1 year is a lot if they are not normal.  not sure how easy they are to file by the public.

the guy is going and should go down.

I wonder if these statistics include where the person was unarmed but the officer "thought" he was armed or in which the person resisted or fought with the officer while being unarmed.  34 should be zero but not sure you are ever going to get zero.  the guy in east austin was unarmed hispanic right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'll start with baby steps...the first being actually wearing a uniform with pants and a collard shirt.  no more BDUs, military boots, camo...none of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I want the pound of flesh for ALL of them.

I want a cop lying to get a person arrested and/or charged and/or convicted to be a felony, punishable by a minimum of 5 years in prison OR the minimum prison term of the charge the lie was intended to support, whichever is greater.

I don't think you'd find anyone that would disagree with you.  Or anyone else in public service for that matter.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

I'd really like to see the MPD statistics on use of force complaints with their other officers.  is it 18 over 19 years?  it seems like 1 year is a lot if they are not normal.  not sure how easy they are to file by the public.

the guy is going and should go down.

I wonder if these statistics include where the person was unarmed but the officer "thought" he was armed or in which the person resisted or fought with the officer while being unarmed.  34 should be zero but not sure you are ever going to get zero.  the guy in east austin was unarmed hispanic right?

Yeah, without context the stats mean almost nothing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I don't think you'd find anyone that would disagree with you.  Or anyone else in public service for that matter.  

I take it you haven't heard of the head of the MPD police union, Lt. Kroll?  He 100% disagrees with me.  Anything that holds cops accountable, and would see them punished for wrongdoing...he opposes.  He literally released a letter to that effect (and reveling in cracking more skulls) just today.

How about the head of the FOP, who actually helped pass a LAW prohibiting video recording of police?  Yes, there are people who oppose accountability for cop bullshit.  Those people are actual leaders of police.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

i'll start with baby steps...the first being actually wearing a uniform with pants and a collard shirt.  no more BDUs, military boots, camo...none of that.

collard_shirt-r07ac9b5a24f145848bf49df3f

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

i'll start with baby steps...the first being actually wearing a uniform with pants and a collard shirt.  no more BDUs, military boots, camo...none of that.

Why they gotta wear vegetables?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

i'll start with baby steps...the first being actually wearing a uniform with pants and a collard shirt.  no more BDUs, military boots, camo...none of that.

If you let your cops dress like the military it's not too long until they're an occupying force. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I don't think you'd find anyone that would disagree with you.  Or anyone else in public service for that matter.  

Actually I think you'd have trouble finding anyone in public office that would support those punishments for cops.  They either need their cooperation to help their conviction rate or they want the police union endorsement so they can campaign on being tough on crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, GotThatFire said:

There’s a fix. There is always a fix.

The problem does not lie just with the police. Citizens and society also have a problem. Can’t put everything on cops. Crime is rampant and violent crime is widespread. Criminals need to take responsibility as well. If you disagree, realize you are a criminals’ champion, then bow out of the conversation because your opinion is invalid.

I want to live my life in peace and happiness and be able to raise my children and let my daughters go out to play and be safe. It would also be cool if they could grow up and not get raped or murdered or sucked into a life of crime by their surroundings. That’s what most people want and until that’s what most people get then it will be hard to fix things. You can’t just fix one thing

Statistically we are in the most peaceful of times.  Just more widespread reporting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

There are many articles I've read on this topic, not pulling up the ones I want readily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I take it you haven't heard of the head of the MPD police union, Lt. Kroll?  He 100% disagrees with me.  Anything that holds cops accountable, and would see them punished for wrongdoing...he opposes.  He literally released a letter to that effect (and reveling in cracking more skulls) just today.

How about the head of the FOP, who actually helped pass a LAW prohibiting video recording of police?  Yes, there are people who oppose accountability for cop bullshit.  Those people are actual leaders of police.

That's a union thing.  Not a LE thing.  I addressed this earlier.  The union stated publicly (via Kroll) that they "intends to support the officers involved."  This is their job as they have configured it.  

Quote

"Now is not the time rush to judgment and immediately condemn our officers. An in-depth investigation is underway. Our officers are fully cooperating. We must review all video. We must wait for the medical examiner's report,......Officers' actions and training protocol will be carefully examined after the officers have provided their statements." 

Sounds a lot like a union acting on behalf of a member, not unlike a defense attorney.  We all know how this will play out.  The union is paying their role in this as well.  Hyperbole and histrionics aside, we know how quickly the union will disavow them after the trial.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, WBT said:

Actually I think you'd have trouble finding anyone in public office that would support those punishments for cops.  They either need their cooperation to help their conviction rate or they want the police union endorsement so they can campaign on being tough on crime.

Again union fuckery.....the elephant in the room nobody wants to tackle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they really need to make more use of stun guns with people that resist arrest initially.  I know it isn't a complete panacea but I think it would help.  nobody likes a cop when confronted but we need people of all races to respect them or nothing will work.  their job is pretty damn difficult.

44 cops died of gunshot and 4 died of vehicle being used as weapon last year so about a 20:1 ratio.  to be honest, I would have thought the ratio would be much higher. City leaders need to tightly manage them, IMO.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Sure doesn't look like that happened in Minneapolis.  18 use of force complaints against Chauvin.  Sure as shit smells like a PD that covers that shit up.  And being that the head the rank-and-file cops calls for exactly that (let us police the way we want to!  Don't handcuff us!), it doesn't come as any surprise.

Where are the studies on how often cops lie on the stand?  Lie in their reports?  In the history of this board, damned near every poster has at least one (often more) stories of cops flat-out lying, committing acts of brutality, or other shit like that.

I'm sorry, but the fact that damned near everyone has a story about a shitty cop encounter --- and note, most of the folks on this forum are college-educated, from relatively decent families, etc. --, and the fact that black community leaders have been telling us about this shit for DECADES tells us that it's real, and it's pervasive.

What about the millions of citizens of all races who have had interactions over generations with cops everywhere who were never abused in any way? Do we hear much from them, or does the cacophony of real complaints drown them out?

As an aside, seems like the various gun boards I read frequently, I see nothing but complaints about all brands of firearms, brand new, that don’t, work, fall apart, are junk (Yeah, including, Ruger, Colt, S&W, Sig, Glock, HK, CZ, etc.) and should be avoided. If I were depending on those multitudes of anecdotes to shop for a gun, I’d carry a baseball bat instead. Never mind what the idiots behind the counter at Cabela’s say.

anyway, that’s a different perspective too, but not a definitive one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

That's a union thing.  Not a LE thing.  I addressed this earlier.  The union stated publicly (via Kroll) that they "intends to support the officers involved."  This is their job as they have configured it.  

Sounds a lot like a union acting on behalf of a member, not unlike a defense attorney.  We all know how this will play out.  The union is paying their role in this as well.  Hyperbole and histrionics aside, we know how quickly the union will disavow them after the trial.  

You're not quoting Kroll.  The head of the union.  Like, at all.  You're being purposefully disingenuous.

Read it.

 

Edited by Brisketexan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TornACL said:

If you let your cops dress like the military it's not too long until they're an occupying force. 

Yeah, the tactical thing makes them look like military wannabes. Then all the MRAP armored vehicles they use to serve a warrant scofflaws who refuse to pay toll charges on the toll ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

At this point in Minneapolis, the results say burn it down( the PD and start over.   You can claim you have the right processes, but then you’re just a negligent motherfucker.  Either way, the results demand change.

 

I bet they don’t...much.   With regard to supervisors and executive level leaders.  Chauvin was just a loose cannon,permitted to repeatedly violate the public’s trust in the PD. It wasn’t really anyone else’s responsibility...

Edited by Iceman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kroll shouldn’t gripe about the protests, but concentrate on his officers’ homicide in the Floyd case - plus the rioters who are causing the violence, damage, arson, looting, and assaults.

I’ve read numerous protest organizers rightly demanding that the latter should stay away from the legit demonstrations that want to remain peaceful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You're not quoting Kroll.  The head of the union.  Like, at all.  You're being purposefully disingenuous.

Read it.

 

Of course I was.  Here is the article.  Not on Twatter, so can't read - but are we separating bashing protests and union-provided support for officers that are guilty until proven innocent?  

Quote

Earlier this week Kroll said that the union intends to support the officers involved. 

"Now is not the time rush to judgment and immediately condemn our officers. An in-depth investigation is underway. Our officers are fully cooperating. We must review all video. We must wait for the medical examiner's report," Kroll said in a statement. "Officers' actions and training protocol will be carefully examined after the officers have provided their statements." 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

Kroll shouldn’t gripe about the protests, but concentrate on his officers’ homicide in the Floyd case - plus the rioters who are causing the violence, damage, arson, looting, and assaults.

I’ve read numerous protest organizers rightly demanding that the latter should stay away from the legit demonstrations that want to remain peaceful.

Agreed.  You can have an opinion on both.  They are not mutually exclusive, but also inexorably connected.  He should know better and will probably pay with his career.  If he really wants to step out there, at the very least disseminate the actual protesters and the rioters.  They are not the same people.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Of course I was.  Here is the article.  Not on Twatter, so can't read - but are we separating bashing protests and union-provided support for officers that are guilty until proven innocent?  

 

You don't get to skip over the letter from today.  You don't.  Nope.  Own it.  It's what he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You don't get to skip over the letter from today.  You don't.  Nope.  Own it.  It's what he said.

He blasted the protesters.  Like I said.  Rioters, I'm guessing really.  Again, what I'm saying is he is going to side with the officers until they are proven guilty.  What do you think happens?  Like a defense attorney, they throw out platitudes of a need for investigation, blah blah and keep the press at arms length.  As head of the union what do you expect him to say?  These guys are 100% guilty and there is no way in hell we're touching them with a 10ft pole, and may they rot in hell?  He's their union rep.  This is the insanity of these public unions.   They have this power because we let them have this power.  

Edited by BabaYaga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

He blasted the protesters.  Like I said.  Rioters, I'm guessing really.  Again, what I'm saying is he is going to side with the officers until they are proven guilty.  What do you think happens?  Like a defense attorney, they throw out platitudes of a need for investigation, blah blah and keep the press at arms length.  As head of the union what do you expect him to say?  These guys are 100% guilty and there is no way in hell we're touching them with a 10ft pole, and may they rot in hell?  He's their union rep.  This is the insanity of these public unions.   They have this power because we let them have this power.  

Yes, calling out "the violent criminal history of George Floyd" is DEFINITELY just stating a proper defense.  He's fucking scum.  Leading scum, and setting an example of scum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the German idea is a great plan. Each state needs to have its own law enforcement academy, and to be a peace officer in your state, you must have gone through the state sanctioned program. The curriculum and training methods could be closely monitored at the state and federal level. All police departments would have to pick from these LEOs. The state and feds would then be responsible for interviewing, psych evals, vetting, and weeding. There would be less Nepotism, and cronyism, and the academy can start teaching them how to, again, protect and serve, and be an asset to their community. For two years, the cadets would have a cookout in an impoverished minority neighborhood every other week, so they would learn to view these people as people, friends, and most importantly the ones they are to protect and serve.

CHIEF 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Brisketexan said:

Yes, calling out "the violent criminal history of George Floyd" is DEFINITELY just stating a proper defense.  He's fucking scum.  Leading scum, and setting an example of scum.

Of course he is.  Nobody is defending him or the officers.  But just shouting at the moon and calling him whatever while not acknowledging the unions and how they are set up cover, conceal, and protect the participants and themselves GIVES HIM THIS POWER.  Which again, is the point.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone that is really trying to start fixing the problem, contact your congressman and insist that they co-sponsor or at least support Justin Amash's bill to End Qualified Immunity.

EZY81rdXsAAwEFv?format=jpg&name=small

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CHIEF said:

I think the German idea is a great plan. Each state needs to have its own law enforcement academy, and to be a peace officer in your state, you must have gone through the state sanctioned program. The curriculum and training methods could be closely monitored at the state and federal level. All police departments would have to pick from these LEOs. The state and feds would then be responsible for interviewing, psych evals, vetting, and weeding. There would be less Nepotism, and cronyism, and the academy can start teaching them how to, again, protect and serve, and be an asset to their community. For two years, the cadets would have a cookout in an impoverished minority neighborhood every other week, so they would learn to view these people as people, friends, and most importantly the ones they are to protect and serve.

CHIEF 

 

I think more layers of bureaucracy lead to the opposite - more nepotism and cronyism like you see with so many other large institutions.  Maybe not.  The issue would be LE's not from or accustomed the areas they manage.  Many precincts required officers to live in the areas they managed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jerry Callo said:

Anyone that is really trying to start fixing the problem, contact your congressman and insist that they co-sponsor or at least support Justin Amash's bill to End Qualified Immunity.

EZY81rdXsAAwEFv?format=jpg&name=small

Qualified immunity has to go. It's nothing but a monstrous creation of the courts. With qualified immunity, police can operate with near impunity.

Any investigations involving police need to be handled by a department without jurisdiction in the same area, so departments that share jurisdiction don't investigate each other. This would be to maintain objectivity and prevent conflicts of interest. Departments also shouldn't perform investigations of other departments responsible for investigating them. Again, remove conflicts of interest.

If states are going to license peace officers, states should have investigatory agencies or ways to track and substantiate complaints against individual officers. Departments are simply incapable of investigating and policing themselves due to conflicts of interest, and too many bad cops simply department hop when they get into too much trouble. If an officer receives too many substantiated complaints in a set time period or commits a major violation, suspend or permanently revoke his license. If he leaves the state or leaves employment as a peace officer, his clock pauses. No getting closer to getting a license revoked, leaving, and then coming back after things have cooled down.

Many cops who commit crimes, and felonies at that, are not prosecuted or are charged with far lesser crimes because prosecutors strike deals where they give up their license to get them off the street in case they lose. Giving an agency the power to revoke these licenses makes this tactic less necessary. Even if the prosecutor loses the case, the outside agency can strip them off their license with a lower threshold of evidence or the ability to incorporate any previous complaints into their decision. It becomes easier to prosecute for higher crimes because there are multiple avenues to get a ****ty cop off the street.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I think more layers of bureaucracy lead to the opposite - more nepotism and cronyism like you see with so many other large institutions.  Maybe not.  The issue would be LE's not from or accustomed the areas they manage.  Many precincts required officers to live in the areas they managed.  

If you have a centralized state academy you must pull up roots to go attend, and a two year commitment, and a rigorous screening process, you are automatically going to have fewer qualified LEOs which should cause an across the board pay increase. Also spending two years with other outstanding cadets of all, races, creeds, and socioeconomic backgrounds, might open their eyes about ALL of the public they will be serving and break down any preconceived notions and stereotypes. If you added this, bust up the unions, and end Qualified Imunity, it should go a long way.

CHIEF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

If states are going to license peace officers, states should have investigatory agencies or ways to track and substantiate complaints against individual officers. Departments are simply incapable of investigating and policing themselves due to conflicts of interest, and too many bad cops simply department hop when they get into too much trouble. If an officer receives too many substantiated complaints in a set time period or commits a major violation, suspend or permanently revoke his license. If he leaves the state or leaves employment as a peace officer, his clock pauses. No getting closer to getting a license revoked, leaving, and then coming back after things have cooled down.

Many cops who commit crimes, and felonies at that, are not prosecuted or are charged with far lesser crimes because prosecutors strike deals where they give up their license to get them off the street in case they lose. Giving an agency the power to revoke these licenses makes this tactic less necessary. Even if the prosecutor loses the case, the outside agency can strip them off their license with a lower threshold of evidence or the ability to incorporate any previous complaints into their decision. It becomes easier to prosecute for higher crimes because there are multiple avenues to get a ****ty cop off the street.

This...is a GREAT suggestion.  It is an end-around on all the other mechanisms (hangups in contracts prevent you from terminating cops, qualified immunity prevents you from getting a judgment against them).  It's an administrative mechanism that gets you to a point of revoking their license, which accomplishes the most important goal for the public  -- getting bad cops out of the uniform and off the street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This...is a GREAT suggestion.  It is an end-around on all the other mechanisms (hangups in contracts prevent you from terminating cops, qualified immunity prevents you from getting a judgment against them).  It's an administrative mechanism that gets you to a point of revoking their license, which accomplishes the most important goal for the public  -- getting bad cops out of the uniform and off the street.

Yep, and there needs to be a hotline, and a way for a complainant to submit evidence to that governing agency directly. I wouldn't count out the locals to just sweep these complaints under the rug. I would buy TV advertisements out the ass to make damn sure the public knew about it too.

CHIEF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

If you have a centralized state academy you must pull up roots to go attend, and a two year commitment, and a rigorous screening process, you are automatically going to have fewer qualified LEOs which should cause an across the board pay increase. Also spending two years with other outstanding cadets of all, races, creeds, and socioeconomic backgrounds, might open their eyes about ALL of the public they will be serving and break down any preconceived notions and stereotypes. If you added this, bust up the unions, and end Qualified Imunity, it should go a long way.

CHIEF

There's a good chance of this.  But it also creates a distancing (similar to a Federal agency) from the local neighborhoods you manage.  That's why so many agencies try to pool candidates from the streets they are going to work.  As mentioned, many had requirements you had to live in the same neighborhoods (which of course failed).....BUT, the groundwork was laid out.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s a bunch of research on stuff that actually works. Interestingly, more training isn’t the answer.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jerry Callo said:

Anyone that is really trying to start fixing the problem, contact your congressman and insist that they co-sponsor or at least support Justin Amash's bill to End Qualified Immunity.

EZY81rdXsAAwEFv?format=jpg&name=small

I’m fine with limiting QI.  But the department pensions should be funding judgments, not taxpayers.  Otherwise it doesn’t do shit.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you find it surprising because you never really sit down and take the time to listen to them.  To hear their stories.  We talk about listening and empathy.  That goes both ways.  It's Florence, AL, BTW.  This was 7 years ago.  So it's sole and separate from any recent events.  They have TV's - everyone hates cops, right.  It's the "thing to do".  Bad cop runs sell TV time.  Good cop stories, who cares.  Rinse.  Wash.  Repeat.  

People hate cops because they habitually lie, and blue wall of silence protect the bad cops. At best, almost all are guilty of misprision of felony. The fact that they are not all abusive murderers is not why I hate them. The fact that the cult of cop will not report the bad ones is why I hate them. The ones you call the ‘not bad apples’ perpetuate this shit by their lies and refusal to report bad cops.

EVERY time you have a death like this, you NEVER see fellow officers stop them or report them. So fuck you and your “ It’s the thing to do” bullshit. I’ve represented and defended cops and I’ve sued cops. The one thing in common was always lying to me about what happened if a fellow officer might get in trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Qualified immunity has to go. It's nothing but a monstrous creation of the courts. With qualified immunity, police can operate with near impunity.

Any investigations involving police need to be handled by a department without jurisdiction in the same area, so departments that share jurisdiction don't investigate each other. This would be to maintain objectivity and prevent conflicts of interest. Departments also shouldn't perform investigations of other departments responsible for investigating them. Again, remove conflicts of interest.

If states are going to license peace officers, states should have investigatory agencies or ways to track and substantiate complaints against individual officers. Departments are simply incapable of investigating and policing themselves due to conflicts of interest, and too many bad cops simply department hop when they get into too much trouble. If an officer receives too many substantiated complaints in a set time period or commits a major violation, suspend or permanently revoke his license. If he leaves the state or leaves employment as a peace officer, his clock pauses. No getting closer to getting a license revoked, leaving, and then coming back after things have cooled down.

Many cops who commit crimes, and felonies at that, are not prosecuted or are charged with far lesser crimes because prosecutors strike deals where they give up their license to get them off the street in case they lose. Giving an agency the power to revoke these licenses makes this tactic less necessary. Even if the prosecutor loses the case, the outside agency can strip them off their license with a lower threshold of evidence or the ability to incorporate any previous complaints into their decision. It becomes easier to prosecute for higher crimes because there are multiple avenues to get a ****ty cop off the street.

 

This is exactly right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Camden, NJ did it.  they fired everyone.  EVERYONE.  then rebuilt the police department focusing on cops walking the street, demilitarized, homegrown, and focused on acting as guardians not warriors.  mixed results, but much more good than bad.  

Edited by troph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:


People hate cops because they habitually lie, and blue wall of silence protect the bad cops. At best, almost all are guilty of misprision of felony. The fact that they are not all abusive murderers is not why I hate them. The fact that the cult of cop will not report the bad ones is why I hate them. The ones you call the ‘not bad apples’ perpetuate this shit by their lies and refusal to report bad cops.

EVERY time you have a death like this, you NEVER see fellow officers stop them or report them. So fuck you and your “ It’s the thing to do” bullshit. I’ve represented and defended cops and I’ve sued cops. The one thing in common was always lying to me about what happened if a fellow officer might get in trouble.

As a young lawyer, I had a brief period when I represented aggrieved cops in actions against their agency.  Some things I learned when I did that: 1) cops are deviant, messed up people.  Seriously, the sex and booze are off the chain.  Hell, younger me was almost jealous (well, not almost -- their weekends sounded kickass).  2) They are the lyingest bunch of people I have EVER dealt with.  I'm not naive, I deal with lying witnesses all the time.  But in the cop cases (cop against cop), EVERYONE was lying, and lying big, and most importantly, they were SKILLED at knowing where the margins are, where the records might prove them wrong, so they wouldn't cross that particular line.  They knew EXACTLY what they could get away with, and they did so with no hesitation.

The most amoral and untrustworthy profession I've ever dealt with (and I've been doing this a long time), and I can't even come up with a close second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jerry Callo said:

Anyone that is really trying to start fixing the problem, contact your congressman and insist that they co-sponsor or at least support Justin Amash's bill to End Qualified Immunity.

Just finished sending an email to my Rep.  Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The most amoral and untrustworthy profession I've ever dealt with (and I've been doing this a long time), and I can't even come up with a close second.

Didn't spend much time with your peers then, I take it.....

200.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Didn't spend much time with your peers then, I take it.....

200.gif

Yeah.....for as crappy as lawyers can be at times.....no, man.   It's not even close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yeah.....for as crappy as lawyers can be at times.....no, man.   It's not even close.

So I was involved in one case where the cops hung some local guy (not so smart, long juvie record, minor drug entrepreneur - you now the type) by his wrists while they played human pinata on his ass with their batons.    So they take this guy to the ER on the way to lock-up because he was moaning and peeing blood and generally being disrespectful about his ass-whoopin'.   Cops say, "You can go to ER, but shut up about the beating."   The guy tells ER he was beaten.  So they take him back, hang him up again and beat him some more.   (The purple welts were striking in color pics two days later.)

Naturally, the Officer Friendly Club says nothing happened.   They theorize that the kid got the bruises "resisting arrest" - which is obviously how you get all of those perfect purple and blue welts on your thighs and torso at various angles - and why the original 911 call and jail logs do not match the time it takes to drive to and from ER - amirite?   Their defense counsel in the civil suit looks deeply pissed after back-to-back-to-back depositions, as not only do the cops' stories not match, the ER staff is BIG pissed and refuting about everything the cops say about the ER visit - especially what he looked like AFTER the ER visit and before the second pinata session.   A largish check is written before the 7th Amendment in all its majesty can be invoked, praise Baby Jesus.  

Not long after, said human pinata dumbass was stopped in his car by the same cops, who were threatened with death or great bodily harm, and had to kill Pinata.Boy.   No dash cams, but trust us, he was going for this throw down gun when we shot him.

So I know some shitty lawyers, but none of them were shitty enough to do that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

So I was involved in one case where the cops hung some local guy (not so smart, long juvie record, minor drug entrepreneur - you now the type) by his wrists while they played human pinata on his ass with their batons.

apparently not if he couldn't figure out he better leave town

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/05/06/rapper-why-this-cop-is-doing-it-right.cnn

Not sure how to post stuff but google Officer Tommy Norman in North Little Rock. The community there seems to love him.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/1/2020 at 6:14 AM, Enchubben said:

Had me all the way until the very last sentence. That’s bullshit.

Haha. I agree 100%, but it's Brisket...what did you expect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take their guns away. Everyday patrol cops have proven they cannot be trusted with lethal force as an option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...